MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100602559

0 Mining

2016· article· en· W7100602559 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering and Materials Science Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Gross domestic productIndex (typography)Manufacturing sectorReal gross domestic productIndustrial productionIndustrial production indexSecondary sector of the economyEconomic indicator
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Industry, especially manufacturing, was one of the key drivers of the transformation in the growth trajectory of the Indian economy witnessed during the post-2000 period. However, a cyclical slowdown began in the industrial sector in 2007-08 and was compounded by the twin global shocks in 2008-09. The effects lingered on briefly in the current fiscal, but growth rebound is now amply evident. Gross domestic product (GDP) growth has clearly revived in the second quarter of the current year and the industrial sector has emerged as one of the prime movers of the process. 9.2 The recovery in the industrial sector is clearly discernible as corroborated by both the data on national accounts and the index of industrial production (IIP). The downward trend observed in the rate of growth of the IIP that spanned almost eight quarters (beginning the first quarter of 2007-08 and continuing through to the last quarter of 2008-09) stands reversed as gleaned from the latest data for the current fiscal. After reaching a trough of 0.6 per cent during the second half of 2008-09, growth in the IIP revived to a level of 7.7 per cent during April-November 2009-10. 9.3 The broad-based nature of the recovery was evident in the pick-up in growth of almost all major components of the IIP (Table 9.1). With the exception CHAPTER 9 Table 9.1: Growth in the IIP and its major components (per cent)

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.171 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEngineering and Materials Science StudiesFrench-language works237,207